BORDER GUARDS BROKE THE LAW

Re: "Border guards need the right to search," editorial, July 21.

In criticizing the decision of Judge Ellen Gordon, the Times Colonist
wrongly points the finger of blame at the judge who decided the case,
rather than at the customs officers who acted in complete disregard of the law.

Gordon did not rule that a search warrant was required before the
vehicle was inspected and a hidden compartment drilled into. However,
consistent with the requirements of the Customs Act, she ruled that a
search warrant was required before the vehicle was transported to
another customs port of entry to be dismantled.

The officers had ample time and ability to obtain an appropriate
warrant. It is possible to obtain a warrant 24 hours a day, 365 days
a year. But it was the evidence of the customs officers that, as far
as they were concerned, no warrant is ever necessary, as long as the
vehicle remains with the confines of a Canadian border port of entry.

The officers also locked the driver inside an immigration office
without advising him that he was being detained or of his rights
under the charter. It was their evidence that they could continue his
forcible confinement for several hours if necessary.

These are not "technicalities." To allow this conduct would empower
customs officers to detain persons and destroy property without
regard to the law and the rights of the public.

The judge correctly points out that contrary to what the customs
officers may have been taught to believe, border crossings are not
"charter-free zones."

Should the acquittal be sustained on appeal, then the fault for
allowing an apparent cocaine trafficker to go unpunished lies with
the customs officers who ignored their obligations under the law, and
with those who have failed to adequately train them.

Frits Verhoeven,

president, Canadian Bar Association, B.C. Branch,

Vancouver.